I first of all want to say how exciting it is to be a part of the 21st century finally. I had not really been a regular resident of the blogosphere until recently (and not long ago I wondered, “What on earth is a blog?” Thankfully, things are changing). What an exciting way to communicate and sharpen one another!
To turn to our NT challenge portion, there is indeed a lot of food for thought in these chapters in Matthew, 8 - 15. But as I read along in Matthew 12, the words of Christ, the God who so freely and wondrously forgives us, suddenly take a shocking turn, when He says that regarding a certain sin, “It will not be forgiven him.” Now wait a minute. How can there be a sin of which a person cannot be forgiven? Can’t God forgive every sin? What is going on here?
It is obviously first crucial that we get the context of what is happening here. At about the midpoint of chapter 12, Jesus has just healed a demon-possessed man. And of course, in the midst of some individuals looking more deeply at these things (”Could this be the Son of David?”), our favorite NT antagonists, the Pharisees, quickly provide their commentary - “This fellow does not cast out demons except by Beelzebub, the ruler of the demons.” This has to be our starting point in answering this question.
Jesus then tests the Pharisees’ words about Satan trying to cast out Satan, and his kingdom being divided against itself, and then expertly dismantles their logic (25-30). But He doesn’t stop there. He then goes on in verses 31 and 32 to talk about a sin of which there is no forgiveness. This sin is inseparably tied to this fatally faulty thinking of the Pharisees.
So, why then is this an unpardonable sin?
The answer, I think, has to do with the individual’s response to God’s witness. When an individual (like the Pharisees) first rejects the witness of the Father, as they did with John the Baptist, they are already in a bad place. However, when they go on to reject the works of Christ (which makes this “unpardonable” sin perhaps unique to the time of Christ’s sojourn on earth…perhaps), calling His works of the devil, they go to an even worse state. However, when a person finally rejects the testimony of Christ based on the work of the Holy Spirit, they cannot be forgiven.
Why can they not be forgiven? Because they willfully place themselves beyond the means by which their hearts could be changed - the Holy Spirit. He is the one who convicts the heart and says, “Look! That’s Jesus. Follow Him.” If that is rejected, there cannot be forgiveness, for the person has rejected the only means by which he could be saved. That makes this sin “unpardonable”.
As I was chatting this morning with Sharon about the unpardonable sin, she had mentioned what she had heard in a “Pastor’s Perspective” broadcast with Brian Brodersen. He had said, “If you are concerned that you’ve committed it, you most likely have not committed it.” I think that is a valid point.
Any thoughts on this?
{ 9 comments… read them below or add one }
Oh, there’s a Calvinist/Arminian argument just begging to be started here!
But, I’ll leave that alone for now. If you’re second point is correct, then are you saying that it is no longer possible to committ the unpardonable sin?
I’m really enjoying this blog thing by the way…
Way to lob a theological grenade there Pastor!!!
Actually I wrestled with this unpardonable thing many years ago to the point of almost tossing my cookies one night in church (it wasn’t CCS). Yeah - good times! It took many years for me to realize the source of my salvation (Eph 2:8-9) and thus taking care of the sick feeling that at some point God was going to veto my salvation. Sure, I have a responsibility to “live it” but God isn’t the Donald waiting to call me into the board room and say “You’re fired”. Just tonight I was reading Romans 8:35-39 to my family. I invite the readers to take a peek at that verse. It really captures the idea of God’s love for us. Thank God He doesn’t give up on us!
I really enjoyed how you related the rejection of the witness of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Many today debate about the ability to blaspheme the Spirit today. Some say that it could only have happened when Christ was performing His earthly ministry. Others say it is possible today to commit such a sin.
I likewise have said the same concept in the quote you posted from Brian Brodersen. I believe that it pretty much comes down to that.
Hopefully, we can be focus less on these theoretical questions and focus more on the practical issues like loving God and my neighbor.
Pastor Ken
To me it seems impossible for a true believer in Christ to ever commit this sin. Just a few chapters ahead our Lord talks about where blasphemy comes from.
“Not what goes into the mouth defiles a man; but what comes out of the mouth, this defiles a man.” (15:11) “That whatever enters the mouth goes into the stomach and is eliminated but those things which proceed out of the mouth come from the heart, and they defile a man. For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies.” (v 17-19)
It is not possible to possess a heart to love God and to blaspheme the Holy Spirit at the same time. It also seems impossible to have committed the sin prior to knowing Christ and still be able to be drawn to Him. It is not by flesh and blood that we come to know Jesus is the Christ, but by our Father in heaven who draws us to Him. (Mat. 16)
Indeed, the topic of the “unpardonable sin” is quite the theological grenade…glad to know that we can be protected from the damage that can unfortunately occur from its being misunderstood…
Perhaps another brave soul would want to field the potential Arminian/Calvinist argument that could stem from this. Good points to consider, however.
I think that it is still possible for hardened unbelievers to commit something like the unpardonable sin, although the question remains as to whether or not this exact sin could be committed without Christ’s being present on earth. My guess is if a person repudiates the claims of Christ in His Word, he could be on the same path as those who are bound in this sin. The Holy Spirit speaks through the Word just as clearly that Jesus is the Christ.
As hiswordistruth had stated, a true believer who has a heart to love God will not at the same time commit this sin. May God set hearts free that are fearful that they’ve committed this sin…
Its interesting that you bring up the “unpardonable sin” at this time. I had a conversation with someone this week who told me that Jesus never spoke to backsliders and therefore they should be treated cruely by believers, as if they had committed an “unpardonable sin”. I realize that they shouldn’t be treated as if everything is okay, but believe they should be treated the way Christ treated us.
Coming from years of believing that every sin might be your last chance and therefore unpardonable, I took issue with the person’s inability to look at the character of Christ (shown to us through His uniqueness in Chapters 1-7).
I challenged the person to look at how Jesus spoke to people, the words and toned He used. The only people I can recall Jesus “yelling” at were the Pharases who had it all figured out. Jesus didn’t run down list of sins before He healed people in chapter 9.
Chapter 9, verse 36 says “When He saw the crowds, He had compassion for them, because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a sheperd.”
In chapter 10 I realized that, and correct me if I’m not looking at this the right way, every Jew Jesus spoke to was a type of backslider. He sent the apostles to ‘the lost house is Isreal’. The Jews had heard the Lord’s word for centuries and turned away again and again to do their own thing. Yet, the love of Christ went back to them time and again preaching salvation.
I thank the Lord that the only “unpardonable sin” is not believing and that, since He knows what we’re going to do before we come to earth, He is merciful enough to give the hard-headed and broken hearted more than one chance to get the point.
I have always loved the book of Matthew, and had just read most of it before we started this blog. I have a question here??? Since every sin is forgivable except for the rejection of Christ, what happens to those who have died before us who never got the chance to hear about Him? This has been a question that my husband keeps asking me and I cannot answer it! My husband is talking about tribes in Africa, 3rd world countries etc., where they have no phones, computers, tv, communication with the outside world for that matter.
I know this post is getting buried as new posts immerge, but I thought the question about those who never got a chance to hear the Gospel is worth attempting an answer. So here goes…
I would suggest referring to Romans, chapter 2. The Apostle Paul gives insight to this very question. The Gentiles (heathen) who were without the Law, had a law unto themselves; Paul called it a “natural law” written on their hearts. Without this law they could not have been found guilty of sin. “Sin is not imputed when there is no law.” Every one of them were guilty of this law, but so too were all who were under the Law of Moses, with the obvious exception of Jesus. The difference is the Law of Moses had provision for sin. If those who were under the Law faithfully followed the law, they were justified by Christ’s atoning sacrifice; justified by faith, not the works of the Law.
How this will all play out for the “ignorant” on Judgment Day I haven’t a clue. But I do know that people who have never heard the Gospel of Christ are not justified by their ignorance. I do, however, believe there are likely exceptions to this such as for those who are too young to be governed by their conscience, and perhaps some who are mentally ill. I say this because Paul said that their conscience bears them witness, either accusing them or excusing them.
It’s a tough question for sure. I look forward to reading other people’s views on this topic when we get into the book of Romans.
As I read through the Gospels again, I am struck by the way Jesus responds to the religious rulers. Obviously they were deserving of rebuke, but Jesus’ choice of words tended to be harsh and apparently spoken very publicly, when He also could have chosen to soften the blow and deliver it more discretely.
At the risk of blasphemy, I ask this question:
Since much of what Jesus said and did was done in a very purposeful way so that “the scriptures might be fulfilled,” is it possible that He intentionally addressed them in this fashion as to provoke them to wrath to the point of crucifixion?
You must log in to post a comment.